The Leftist Politics of the Nobel Peace Prize, Part 1

Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize yesterday for whatÂ the Norwegian Nobel CommitteeÂ called “his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples”; his “vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons”; and his efforts to create a “new climate” of “multilateral diplomacy” in international relations.

Mind you, allÂ Nobel nominations must be submitted by February 1 of the year in which they are to be awarded, meaning that Obama, who took his oath of office as President on January 20, was nominated for the Prize within his first twelve days in office. Had Obama achieved anything of substance during those few days to merit such an award? No serious thinker could argue that he had. His nomination is but a testament to the fact that the Nobel Peace Prize has increasingly devolved into an honor awarded to recipients who reflect the Nobel Committeeâ€™sÂ leftist politics and preferences. Consider some of the more notable winners of recent years.

In 2005 the Nobel Peace Prize was presented to Mohamed ElBaradei, an Egyptian attorney who has served as Director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) since 1997. Under his leadership, the IAEA’s strategy of appeasement proved unsuccessful atÂ dissuading North Korea from developing a nuclear weapons program in the late 1990s.Â Yet ElBaradei is employing the same approach today to address Iran’s well-documented pursuit of nuclear power.Â He hasÂ suggested in diplomatic circles that the best course of action may be to tolerate small-scale uranium enrichment in Iran, in exchange for Tehran’s pledge to eschew the production of nuclear armaments — a plan very similar to the failed bargain he struck with North Korea.

The 2002 Nobel Peace Prize recipient wasÂ Jimmy Carter, who strongly opposed America’s looming invasion of Iraq. WhenÂ the former U.S. PresidentÂ was officially given his award, Nobel Committee Chairman Gunnar Berge told reporters that Carter’s honor “should be interpreted as a criticism of the line that the current [U.S.] administration has taken. It’s a kick in the leg to all that follow the same line as the United States.”

So much for the fanciful notion that the voting process for the Nobel Peace Prize is anything more than a politically motivated spitting contest.